• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

History: Racism in America Today.

I'm not avoiding the question. I'd say the primary reason is an unlevel playing field.

Now, are you going to ignore the refutation of your theory on racism and its impact on blacks in America?

You haven’t refuted anything I’ve presented. Is your answer to the question, ie your theory, that an unlevel playing fields exists between the majority of black people who are economically sound and the minority who are not?
 
Reconstruction was doomed when the former states of the Confederacy were again controlled by white southerners who championed white supremacy.

That and the 1865/1866 passage of the "Black Codes" in the southern states. The purpose of these laws was to preserve slavery in the former slave states.
Black codes actually reached further than southern states, they were imposed as far as pennsylvania too.
 
How about the wave of immigrants who came America after the civil war. How did those before come to hate African-Americans? Just trying to understand where you are coming from and if there is any basis to think the above is valid.
White supremacy was quite embedded in America.
 
The notion that black people were “held back” economically requires more examination. Segregation and racism could certainly impact a black person’s ability to participate in the existing economy at the time, but it wasn’t a deterministic ‘holding back.’ In fact, it had the effect of creating a secondary economy in which black entrepreneurs catering to the needs and wants of black people became very rich indeed. CJ Walker, daughter of slaves, became America’s first self-made millionairess of any color. So, this isn’t so much an issue of what white people did or didn’t do to black people but why some black people saw and took advantage of economic opportunity and others didn’t.
You know what happened to that wealth?.... its going to destroy your narrative.
 
You haven’t refuted anything I’ve presented. Is your answer to the question, ie your theory, that an unlevel playing fields exists between the majority of black people who are economically sound and the minority who are not?
You may want to consider the saying...Just because you say it doesn't make it so. The attempt to conflate differences within a race is textbook racist ideals. How would you answer that question to describe the difference between successful and unsuccessful whites? Women? Gay people?
 
I've tried to figure that out, and I do believe that certain self-interests could prevail over racism. Economic (tax cuts and deregulation), single-issue voters and idol worshippers. I feel a large number of those voters are simply afraid of change. Not societal change, but changes to their individual lives. I think fear motivates many djt supporters. There are obviously others I have not thought about.

What about racism? A comparatively small amount of djt supporters are overtly racist. They are justly scorned by most. The racist power structures that support our society benefit all people who have never needed to consider the color of their skin. It's no longer enough to say 'I'm not a racist'. It is time to be anti-racist. IMO
Racism is often very much tied to selfish interests. It was a structure deliberately set up.
 
Don't forget about the Myth of the Lost Cause which erased slavery from the war in order to unite northern and southern whites at the expense of African-Americans.
 
You may want to consider the saying...Just because you say it doesn't make it so. The attempt to conflate differences within a race is textbook racist ideals. How would you answer that question to describe the difference between successful and unsuccessful whites? Women? Gay people?

Nonsense. It’s not “racist” to point out the fact that presenting racism as a deterministic monolith responsible for black poverty rates is factually incorrect and fallacious. Black people were exposed to the same racism and limitations in their participation in the existing economy during the reconstruction and Jim Crow era with different outcomes. Some accumulated substantial wealth, some were middle class, and some were impoverished.

The existence of those systems factually did not determine which of those categories they would ultimately fall into and certainly does not for the minority of black people who live in poverty today. Racism is factually not deterministic so if you want an answer to why a minority of black people are impoverished then you won’t find it there and need to examine the differences between them and the majority who are not.
 
Nonsense. It’s not “racist” to point out the fact that presenting racism as a deterministic monolith responsible for black poverty rates is factually incorrect and fallacious. Black people were exposed to the same racism and limitations in their participation in the existing economy during the reconstruction and Jim Crow era with different outcomes. Some accumulated substantial wealth, some were middle class, and some were impoverished.

The existence of those systems factually did not determine which of those categories they would ultimately fall into and certainly does not for the minority of black people who live in poverty today. Racism is factually not deterministic so if you want an answer to why a minority of black people are impoverished then you won’t find it there and need to examine the differences between them and the majority who are not.
Huge fallacy comparing within the race to discuss racism. Put all white people in the same rubric and you see the same results. When comparing, talk about wealth in the top % between the races. Racist power structures exist to enforce the caste. Look at the universal data first. Start subtracting factors after. I'm done, unless you want to answer my original question. In light of your statement...

"From a historical standpoint, racism and segregation only succeeded in creating a secondary parallel economy in which black entrepreneurs thrived and a distinct upper and middle class formed."

How do you explain Tulsa 1921?
 
Huge fallacy comparing within the race to discuss racism. Put all white people in the same rubric and you see the same results. When comparing, talk about wealth in the top % between the races. Racist power structures exist to enforce the caste. Look at the universal data first.

The universal data is that the majority of black people are not impoverished. You need to explain that in the context of your theory because the majority experience does not align with your conclusion.

"From a historical standpoint, racism and segregation only succeeded in creating a secondary parallel economy in which black entrepreneurs thrived and a distinct upper and middle class formed."

How do you explain Tulsa 1921?

It doesn’t need explanation because it’s not a refutation for what you quoted. The black upper and middle class did not cease to exist as a result of that event.
 
The universal data is that the majority of black people are not impoverished. You need to explain that in the context of your theory because the majority experience does not align with your conclusion.



It doesn’t need explanation because it’s not a refutation for what you quoted. The black upper and middle class did not cease to exist as a result of that event.
Your first response is a swing and a miss. You declare universal data and separate by race. Your non-response to the second is noted. I'm done.
 
I've tried to figure that out, and I do believe that certain self-interests could prevail over racism. Economic (tax cuts and deregulation), single-issue voters and idol worshippers. I feel a large number of those voters are simply afraid of change. Not societal change, but changes to their individual lives. I think fear motivates many djt supporters. There are obviously others I have not thought about.

What about racism? A comparatively small amount of djt supporters are overtly racist. They are justly scorned by most. The racist power structures that support our society benefit all people who have never needed to consider the color of their skin. It's no longer enough to say 'I'm not a racist'. It is time to be anti-racist. IMO
Your comments deserve more time than I have right now. I'll get back to you tomorrow hopefully.
For now, thanks for your thoughtful and rational comments.
 
To what wealth are you referring?
Black wall street. It was bombed from aircraft. The civil rights movement was not the end anymore than reconstruction was the end of racist power structures. Now we are dealing with the forebears of that legacy within the GOP which is stuffed with Q-anon crazies.
 
Last edited:
mrjurrs said:
I've tried to figure that out, and I do believe that certain self-interests could prevail over racism. Economic (tax cuts and deregulation), single-issue voters and idol worshippers. I feel a large number of those voters are simply afraid of change. Not societal change, but changes to their individual lives. I think fear motivates many djt supporters. There are obviously others I have not thought about.


What about racism? A comparatively small amount of djt supporters are overtly racist. They are justly scorned by most. The racist power structures that support our society benefit all people who have never needed to consider the color of their skin. It's no longer enough to say 'I'm not a racist'. It is time to be anti-racist. IMO

I can only say that it depends on the meaning of the words 'overtly racist'. But I would agree on people needing to be more 'anti-racist.
 
My basic premise is that slavery was never positively condemned in America because Union required compromise. And thus, the end of slavery was never completely accepted by the American south and those feelings of resentment on losing their rights to keep black slaves has led to present day racism.

Only a complete and honest discussion will lead to some resolution of the problem, or at least be able to provide some direction on where America needs to go from here on in.

Everyone please keep your comments on topic and relating to the title of this thread. I'll be asking for our moderators to police this topic in accordance with the rules and requirements of the academia section.
Though the American Civil War was fought for economic reasons (the North couldn't compete with the South's slave labor), the North's marketing and recruitment was "God hates slavery!"

Thus the more than 600,000 Union soldiers who died in the war participated to "end the slavery that God hates" .. and that's a pretty big condemnation of slavery in the minds of the people.

So I don't think there's any question -- clearly slavery was positively condemned.

It doesn't matter, though, that slavery was clearly positively condemned, as the South, who lost the war, at a cost of nearly a million confederate soldiers' lives, was not psychologically able to accept that condemnation which meant they'd be on the emotional hook for the roughly two million people killed in the war, beyond the psychological tolerance level of most.

To even hold slaves requires a suspending of acceptance of reality associated with morality. Thus slaveholders were psychologically forced to think of slaves as anything from an inferior breed of human to a form of animal. Thus the slaver holder's "superiority" justified the holding, working, and caring for these "inferior" beings, an attitude a war and condemnation couldn't psychologically defeat.

Thus after the war the slave holders were now forced to live and work alongside of former slaves as equals, which conflicted with the former slaveholders' attitude of being superior, an understandably psychologically unshakable attitude, that no amount or type of "education" could ever expect to remedy.

Also, since nearly all slaves had been of African descent, their race was an obvious visual difference between them and their former slaveholders, and these former slaves comparative lack of intelligence, on average, was reflected in their behavior that was also different from that of former slaveholders.

So though some of the racist behaviors changed with the abolition of slavery, racist attitudes in the South remained, and understandably so. Without adequate psychotherapy for every Southerner, they were left with denial and anger as their most often blocked stages of associated loss grief, never quite making it to bargaining, depression, and acceptance for what would be many generations.

Once the denial and anger blocks occurred, they became reflected in the Southern culture, which in turn became a form of "education curriculum" in Southern society that kept racism cemented into their culture.

With each generation, though, more and more Southerners broke through to the bargaining, depression, and acceptance stages of Southern grief .. and they, in turn, spared their children from it .. which ended racism for them.

But many people still passed the denial and anger block to their kids, kids who couldn't move on from their parents' racism because the culture of "obey your parents with Southern respect" kept them at the same blocked stage.

Indeed, I know some Americans who had to overcome this blockage. One person's Southern grandfather was born in the late 1860s, his dad was born a bit after the turn of the century, and he was born half way through the 20th century. He's told me that his dad was still very racist, even in the 1960s, and that he had to work psychologically within his own mind to overcome his dad's legacy racism, which kept his own kids and grandkids from being racist.

My point is that overcoming Southern racism isn't merely an education task, it's mostly, maybe predominantly, a psychotherapy task, as that degree of deep recovery is necessary to break generational links and overcome many decades of Southern denial and anger that has been part of their culture.

But with each recent generation, however, greater strides have been made by individual Southerners to shed their psychological legacy of slavery and racism.

Today, most Southerns are simply not racist in this regard.

The small percentage who are racist continues to dwindle as I just presented. But until then, no amount of education can dispel an attitude that is steeped in their family's or their local culture's blocked denial and anger.

They need self-help or professional psychotherapy, and only psychotherapy will make the necessary individual difference.
 
It's not my intent to sell your careful and courteous post short, but I do have to raise a few points of disagreement.

Though the American Civil War was fought for economic reasons (the North couldn't compete with the South's slave labor), the North's marketing and recruitment was "God hates slavery!"

I'll accept that economic reasons is a factor but it's not the only factor. And it differs from the other factor you mention which is religious commitments



Today, most Southerns are simply not racist in this regard.

I would suggest that the large majority are racist to some extent and that was proven with the south's huge support of Trump. Anyone who fails to speak out against his birtherism would of necessity be someone who can condone racism. And I'm not suggesting that a good sized portion of the north aren't racists too. America created a race problem with it's lack of acceptance of black people for far too long, and now has a situation that is common to no other modern country. The answer so far has been to use force against black people, including deadly force. The question now becomes one of finding a way to fix the problem when force is obviously not working.

The small percentage who are racist continues to dwindle as I just presented. But until then, no amount of education can dispel an attitude that is steeped in their family's or their local culture's blocked denial and anger.

They need self-help or professional psychotherapy, and only psychotherapy will make the necessary individual difference.

It's not a small percentage but it's not the same level of racism problem, in that the south's racists aren't lynching black people anymore. It's getting close to the equivalent with police murder of black men.

Trump appealed directly to racism and succeeded on that account, very similar to how Hitler did the same with the Jews to gain the support of the German people.
 
It's not my intent to sell your careful and courteous post short, but I do have to raise a few points of disagreement.
I presented an accurate account relevant to your OP, in the spirit of academia.

One of the challenges we all face, left, right, and center, is where do we get our information, is it accurate, does it come from a troll farm, is it tailored for our viewing to sell its advertisers' products, etc.

As I watch from the center many people, even moderate left v moderate right, misunderstand each other because they are often both under false premise in their argumentation, I realize the challenge, even in academia, of communicating well ..

.. Which is indeed why I was careful.


I'll accept that economic reasons is a factor but it's not the only factor. And it differs from the other factor you mention which is religious commitments
An accurate account of history does teach us that, though some in the North found slavery repugnant, the foundational motivation to go to war came from business owners who could not compete on a number of playing fields with the South's slave labor.

For years, however, the North couldn't motivate their people to go to war to fight, kill, and die for these economic reasons, as serious as they were.

But when these business owners representatives finally said enough is enough, they began spreading editorials about the evils of slavery, that it was an abomination to God, and that it was the North's duty to God to put an end to it, as necessary, even by war.

Of course, when that message reached a crescendo, it forced the South into secession .. and that brought war .. and a few years later the Emancipation Proclamation that made it then clear to all what was on the table.

The evils of slavery, being an abomination to God, etc., wasn't about "religion", though various Christian denominations "played along". It was about marketing and recruitment to get Northerners to fight, kill, and die for Northern business' sake.


I would suggest that the large majority are racist to some extent and that was proven with the south's huge support of Trump.
The South has supported candidates running under the Republican Party label for many decades. This is because the Republicans are more conservative by virtue of being the party of the two that supports the status quo, traditional economic capitalism, social practices, Christianity, and the like. These are traditions that appeal to the South who value tradition, especially these traditions, the south being greatly rural.

That's really all there is to it, mostly.

The South had been voting Republican for Presidency long before Trump.

Thus there's simply no evidence that there was "the large majority" in the South that is "racist" merely because they voted Republican/Trump, as there's nothing racist about conservative values, though BLM has attempted to so erroneously paint.



Anyone who fails to speak out against his birtherism would of necessity be someone who can condone racism.
Here you begin to stray from academia and wander into leftist political rhetoric.

The "birther movement" isn't about racism, not according to accurate definitions of racism ( ACCURATELY Defined Racism and Discrimination -- The Ethical Standard We Should ALL Observe ).

Illinois Senate candidate Andy Martin first presented in his 2004 Senate campaign that Obama was not born in America, that his father, born in Kenya, was the connection. Troll farms picked it up and spread it .. and a movement started, a movement not about race but about country of origin and for the purpose, thereby, of disqualifying Obama, every Democrat's "Prince of Wales" and a clear star in general, as a candidate for the Presidency. There was nothing more to it than that.

Thus Republicans were attracted to the birther concept, including Trump, a Republican.

That's all there is to it.

It's not about racism.

That leftist journalists and campaigners have falsely alluded that "the birther movement is racist" is merely a false allegation attempt to discredit the movement and candidates who support it, for the sake of winning elections.
 
And I'm not suggesting that a good sized portion of the north aren't racists too. America created a race problem with it's lack of acceptance of black people for far too long, and now has a situation that is common to no other modern country. The answer so far has been to use force against black people, including deadly force. The question now becomes one of finding a way to fix the problem when force is obviously not working.
I'm afraid now you've completely left academia.

You're now into "racists this" and "racists that" leftist hyperbole land, leaping to unjustified conclusions from false premises of leftist rhetoric.

Your speculation about "a good sized portion of the north" being racist, that America suffers a "lack of acceptance of Black people" and that America has been resolved in general "to use force against Black people, including deadly force" are simply not in accurate evidence. Thus your conclusion that begins with "the question now becomes ..." is simply inapplicable.

Indeed, the picture of America prior to 2013 is one of the overwhelming vast majority of their people exhibiting no racism, with no such thing as "structural racism".

Then along came the formation of the Marxist communist organization Black Lives Matter (BLM). They said they were formed in response to an incident of a police homicide of a Black person, but accurate analysis has shown that's simply the convenient excuse they made. Their avowed Marxist purpose is to set Blacks against Whites in a typical Marxist dualism of oppressed v. oppressor, stirring up hatred in those so susceptible to being duped via BLM's conspiracy theory about "structural racism" and other false assertions such as "the police all over America target Black people with brutality". They then presented their virtue signal of "anti-racism" to combat this non-existent problem, setting their cultist followers into a mass hysteria. But their "anti-racism" is only a Trojan horse with which they hope to create chaos and destabilize capitalist society to create communist inroads.

Today all the false hype about racism has been caused by BLM, and it has infected many people to the detriment of their ability to accurately perceive reality.


It's not a small percentage but it's not the same level of racism problem, in that the south's racists aren't lynching black people anymore. It's getting close to the equivalent with police murder of black men.
Police are simply not "murdering Black men" with the frequency equivalent that the old South's racists were lynching Black people.

Accurate statistics show that the police throughout America do not target Black people. Those statistics do accurately show that over 52% of the murders committed in America are committed by Black people who are only 12% of the population. And statistics show that those Black men killed by police are vastly in self-defense, rarely by police error, and very rarely actual murder.



Trump appealed directly to racism and succeeded on that account, very similar to how Hitler did the same with the Jews to gain the support of the German people.
And now you've simply gone off the left extremist edge, making rhetorical propaganda statements simply not in academia actual evidence.

But this is your second rhetorical reference to Trump, complete with a Hitler equivalency. That's not academia material.

Ironically, though, the only people-organization in America today with behavior-M.O. that's scarily reminiscent of Nazi Germany as well as the 1910s Bolsheviks .. is BLM.
 
Lincoln did not have the stomach to weed out the worst of the worst and hang them from the gallows. He should have though. Officers on up should have been spared no quarter. Enlisted men maybe could have been given a choice: give your property to a black family or swing like your leaders.
that sort of nonsense would have resulted in years of guerrilla war by southern military members. Fortunately Lincoln was smarter than that
 
I'm afraid now you've completely left academia.

You're now into "racists this" and "racists that" leftist hyperbole land, leaping to unjustified conclusions from false premises of leftist rhetoric.

Your speculation about "a good sized portion of the north" being racist, that America suffers a "lack of acceptance of Black people" and that America has been resolved in general "to use force against Black people, including deadly force" are simply not in accurate evidence. Thus your conclusion that begins with "the question now becomes ..." is simply inapplicable.

Indeed, the picture of America prior to 2013 is one of the overwhelming vast majority of their people exhibiting no racism, with no such thing as "structural racism".

The vast majority of Americans are careful to not openly display their racist feeling and certainly most don't act out violently against black people, but the prevalence of racism in America can't be ignored.

Then along came the formation of the Marxist communist organization Black Lives Matter (BLM). They said they were formed in response to an incident of a police homicide of a Black person, but accurate analysis has shown that's simply the convenient excuse they made. Their avowed Marxist purpose is to set Blacks against Whites in a typical Marxist dualism of oppressed v. oppressor, stirring up hatred in those so susceptible to being duped via BLM's conspiracy theory about "structural racism" and other false assertions such as "the police all over America target Black people with brutality". They then presented their virtue signal of "anti-racism" to combat this non-existent problem, setting their cultist followers into a mass hysteria. But their "anti-racism" is only a Trojan horse with which they hope to create chaos and destabilize capitalist society to create communist inroads.

I had considered you rational until you suggest that BLM is a Marxist communist organization.

Today all the false hype about racism has been caused by BLM, and it has infected many people to the detriment of their ability to accurately perceive reality.

I would suggest that BLM was formed to be a protest movement against racism and against the police murdering of black people in America. Black people in America are no more leftist, socialist, or communists than are leftists in Canada. Probably less leftist than Canada's more leftist NDP. This Marxist communism in America is utter nonsense and any Canadian should understand that.

Your failing to recognize and understand America's racism problem doesn't speak well for 'you'. We have no common ground on which to continue and that's because you've rejected that which I had to offer.



Police are simply not "murdering Black men" with the frequency equivalent that the old South's racists were lynching Black people.

Accurate statistics show that the police throughout America do not target Black people. Those statistics do accurately show that over 52% of the murders committed in America are committed by Black people who are only 12% of the population. And statistics show that those Black men killed by police are vastly in self-defense, rarely by police error, and very rarely actual murder.




And now you've simply gone off the left extremist edge, making rhetorical propaganda statements simply not in academia actual evidence.

But this is your second rhetorical reference to Trump, complete with a Hitler equivalency. That's not academia material.

Ironically, though, the only people-organization in America today with behavior-M.O. that's scarily reminiscent of Nazi Germany as well as the 1910s Bolsheviks .. is BLM.
[/QUOTE]
 
The vast majority of Americans are careful to not openly display their racist feeling
Really?

How do you know that, academically speaking?

I mean, if they're careful not to "openly display their racist feeling", how are you so god-like perceptive to see their "racist feeling" that they've hidden so well?

:rolleyes:

The much more likely truth is the vast majority of Americans simply aren't racist, obviously.


and certainly most don't act out violently against black people
And maybe they aren't "acting out violently against Black people" because .. .. they're actually not racist or violent.

I think you've perhaps been reading a lot of leftist troll farm material.


but the prevalence of racism in America can't be ignored.
There is no "prevalence of racism in America" to ignore -- it doesn't exist ..

.. Except in the minds of the emotionally weak and susceptible to BLM's conspiracy theory mass hysteria that there is.

But, of course, such fantasies do not reflect reality.


I had considered you rational until you suggest that BLM is a Marxist communist organization.
I had considered you a budding academic .. until you started rattling off leftist rhetoric false allegations of racism a la a BLM spokesperson.

But again, this goes back to what I lead with in my first post, that depending on where you get your "news" .. well, you may be shocked to find that you're not being told everything by "mainstream media".

Did you know that the founders of BLM have openly admitted in interviews that they are trained Marxists?

Did you know that BLM's founding philosophy is the communist ideology called critical race theory?

Did you know that critical race theory is a "oppressed Blacks v. oppressor Whites" version of the communist ideology called critical theory that was created by communist immigrants from Germany in the 1930s who fled Hitler to America?

I mean, I could go on .. but it's clear to me you aren't getting your "news" about BLM from any accurate, reliable source.

You might want to get caught up to speed.


Black people in America are no more leftist, socialist, or communists than are leftists in Canada. Probably less leftist than Canada's more leftist NDP. This Marxist communism in America is utter nonsense and any Canadian should understand that.
But again, you simply don't get it.

The 99+ percent of BLMers, they don't know anything about what Marxism is or maybe even communism, and they've shown they don't know the ins and outs of socialism either.

But .. they don't have to know!

They do BLM's Marxist communist bidding simply by joining their "cancel culture" mob, and doing all the "anti-racist" bullying, rioting, looting, assault and murder they did all last summer, because all that functions to destabilize capitalist society, creating chaos, falsely labeling the biggest opposition party -- the Republicans -- racists .. .. and that's exactly what BLM wants them to do: to be their Marxist communist foot soldiers, without being any the wiser!

And any Canadian not seduced by BLM should know it.


Your failing to recognize and understand America's racism problem doesn't speak well for 'you'.
Prior to 2013's formation of BLM, there simply was no "racism" problem in America.

BLM has simply antagonized everyone since then with false accusations of racism .. and that's the only thing that's manufacturing a "racism" problem in America.

Indeed, if BLM doesn't stop with all the false allegations of racism in America, they may end up with a race war on their hands of their own making.


We have no common ground on which to continue and that's because you've rejected that which I had to offer.
No, our lack of common ground is that you're all caught up in the BLM mass hysteria .. and I'm not.
 
Back
Top Bottom